although the parts you mention #3&4 are the development of samadhi not sammasamadhi itself from my reading of the passages

As I understand it, it is implied that these developments of concentration are, or at least in order to be true samma-samadhi, are complemented by the rest of the eightfold path as that quote from MN 117 states. Also notice that the first item of that list, jhana, which is often associated with right samadhi, doesn't have the epithet of "right" attached to it either. But I don't think that this means that they aren't talking about right samadhi here.

But yeah, it doesn't explicitly state that they are right concentration, either. But I think when you take all of the passages together, the picture is fairly clear. Any singleness of mind, weather focused on the development of jhana, or in contemplation of the aggregates or of feelings, or all of them together, when supported by the rest of the path, becomes right concentration.

although the parts you mention #3&4 are the development of samadhi not sammasamadhi itself from my reading of the passages

As I understand it, it is implied that these developments of concentration are, or at least in order to be true samma-samadhi, are complemented by the rest of the eightfold path as that quote from MN 117 states. Also notice that the first item of that list, jhana, which is often associated with right samadhi, doesn't have the epithet of "right" attached to it either. But I don't think that this means that they aren't talking about right samadhi here.

But yeah, it doesn't explicitly state that they are right concentration, either. But I think when you take all of the passages together, the picture is fairly clear. Any singleness of mind, weather focused on the development of jhana, or in contemplation of the aggregates or of feelings, or all of them together, when supported by the rest of the path, becomes right concentration.

I agree here, all I was aiming at pointing out was the passages don't say explicitly....I had looked for a quote a day or so ago looking for where it gives an alternative definition of sammasamadhi, and until I saw the A2I doc couldn't hadn#t found one, but didn't spend much time looking tbh.

ps I asked the same and still waiting.

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

In a publicly available correspondence between Bhikkhu Bodhi and B. Alan Wallace, Bodhi has described Ven. Nyanaponika Thera's views on "right mindfulness" and sampajañña in the following fashion:

... I should add that Ven. Nyanaponika himself did not regard “bare attention” as capturing the complete significance of satipaṭṭhāna, but as representing only one phase, the initial phase, in the meditative development of right mindfulness. He held that in the proper practice of right mindfulness, sati has to be integrated with sampajañña, clear comprehension, and it is only when these two work together that right mindfulness can fulfill its intended purpose.[12] "

the reliability of that document for me is suspect due to several quirks noticed in a quick scim through.

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

same reason I wouldn't find a math textbook reliable when it states 1+1=2.5 as a correct equation.

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

it is misleading due to the translation it uses of words, and its dealing with words as the same which are different this is blatently obvious just with the two quotes from it you and myself provided, inaccurate = unreliable

1 + 1 = 2.5 = wrong1 + 1 = 2 = correct

what are you trying to prove?

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

it is misleading due to the translation it uses of words, and its dealing with words as the same which are different this is blatently obvious just with the two quotes from it you and myself provided, inaccurate = unreliable

1 + 1 = 2.5 = wrong1 + 1 = 2 = correct

what are you trying to prove?

Nothing.

You just mentioned that you found the document unreliable and I was asking why? I am really not trying to "prove" anything.

You just mentioned that you found the document unreliable and I was asking why? I am really not trying to "prove" anything.

In relation this this thread you started, as with your other threads, you do seem be agenda driven.

.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

Brizzy wrote:WOW! I can't ask a question, without "having an agenda" I think the metta that I feel coming from vipassana practitioner's is the only thing that keeps me going.

It is not so much asking a question, but it is how you structured the questions you have asked - and much of your responses - and this response rather makes it clear - agenda. Having an agenda, however, does not negate the questions ask, so ask away. And thanks for feeling the metta.

.

++++++++++++++++This being is bound to samsara, kamma is his means for going beyond. -- SN I, 38.

There is freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning. If there were not this freedom from birth, freedom from becoming, freedom from making, freedom from conditioning, then escape from that which is birth, becoming, making, conditioning, would not be known here. -- Ud 80

Ar scáth a chéile a mhaireas na daoine.People live in one another’s shelter.

Brizzy wrote:WOW! I can't ask a question, without "having an agenda" I think the metta that I feel coming from vipassana practitioner's is the only thing that keeps me going.

It is not so much asking a question, but it is how you structured the questions you have asked - and much of your responses - and this response rather makes it clear - agenda. Having an agenda, however, does not negate the questions ask, so ask away. And thanks for feeling the metta.

You just mentioned that you found the document unreliable and I was asking why? I am really not trying to "prove" anything.

you have been asked this before on this thread, by myself and others, you definitely appear to be trying to prove something or working with an agenda.

I gave an example when I said I found that document unreliable, nothing more needed to be added, I am not going to pick through a document to slam it.

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

You just mentioned that you found the document unreliable and I was asking why? I am really not trying to "prove" anything.

you have been asked this before on this thread, by myself and others, you definitely appear to be trying to prove something or working with an agenda.

I gave an example when I said I found that document unreliable, nothing more needed to be added, I am not going to pick through a document to slam it.

You queried "sampajanna is mindfulness?"

Mindfulness is an english word that is used for "sati"

Now mindfulness these days, has been reduced to bare attention, the document seems to be assigning sampajanna for mindfulness or constant attention. You actually mentioned there were several inaccuracies but mentioned only one. I have no "agenda" and if you dont want to read the document - cool - but you can hardly make informed observations if you dont.

There was no query, no claiming something wasn't needed, and nothing else implied!

try reading what I actually put.

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

Of course you are correct. The only thing you stated was that a document you had "a quick scim through" was unreliable due to several quirks. I was merely asking what they were - No Agendas. However it is probably best if I stop asking you what they were.

Of course you are correct. The only thing you stated was that a document you had "a quick scim through" was unreliable due to several quirks. I was merely asking what they were - No Agendas. However it is probably best if I stop asking you what they were.

well if I point out one, and one is in your own quote, there should be no need, they were obvious, all you proceded to do was give counter arguments to what wasn't being argued against, that makes you look more and more like you are trying to prove something, or have an agenda.

you don't have to read something cover to cover analysing every word to see if it meet a certain standard of reliability, same way you don't need to walk all the way into a pig sty to know how it smells. if you want to trash things that is great, but don't expect others to do more than they feel is necessary.

This offering maybe right, or wrong, but it is one, the other, both, or neither!Blog,-Some Suttas Translated,Ajahn Chah."Others will misconstrue reality due to their personal perspectives, doggedly holding onto and not easily discarding them; We shall not misconstrue reality due to our own personal perspectives, nor doggedly holding onto them, but will discard them easily. This effacement shall be done."

"When we transcend one level of truth, the new level becomes what is true for us. The previous one is now false. What one experiences may not be what is experienced by the world in general, but that may well be truer. (Ven. Nanananda)

“I hope, Anuruddha, that you are all living in concord, with mutual appreciation, without disputing, blending like milk and water, viewing each other with kindly eyes.” (MN 31)

“No lists of things to be done. The day providential to itself. The hour. There is no later. This is later. All things of grace and beauty such that one holds them to one's heart have a common provenance in pain. Their birth in grief and ashes.” - Cormac McCarthy, The Road

Learn this from the waters:in mountain clefts and chasms,loud gush the streamlets,but great rivers flow silently.- Sutta Nipata 3.725